For those who don't get the name, it's based on the anime series Hikaru No Go which is about a boy who is taught to play Go play the ghost of a former pro player from thousands of years ago.
If you are interested in playing Go online, I would recommend Kiseido Go Server, is it is the best there is and its java so it can run on almost any platform.
This tech isn't new. It is the same as was used to make the movie 405 which is freely available for download online. In this short film they pointed a camera on top of a bridge overlooking the highway and took several frames and then spliced them all together so that they could have footage of the highway that looked like there were no cars on it. This is the same idea being used with these glasses, only in real time.
It sounds like the plans are coming together nicely for overlord robots.
I am skeptical this technology will ever actually take off in carpets like the article suggests. Who would want to have their carpet tell them they were a fatass every time they got up to walk around?
Easy. Start with the 500th oldest edit. Check it if says James brown is great. If yes, go to edit 250. If yes again, go to 125. If no go to 375. Just keep splitting it down the middle and you will never have to look up more than 10 article versions to find out where the change happened. Even if you have no idea where this change occurred it shouldn't take more than 3 minutes to find out even with no formal system.
Speaking of "What the hell was I thinking" how can Bill be both against OSS because it reduces jobs and for the ability to outsource jobs to India? Is there anyone who thinks that this is not doublethink?
I was about to make the same joke, but let me instead add this. Back in 6th grade I used to play the Star Wars Collectable Card Game a bit and they had a weekly chat in an environment with custom star wars themed backgrounds where each person chose an avatar. Or at least that's what I heard because it was a 24 meg download and I could never get it to actually work back in the day. So this technology is at least 9 years old, probably even older than that.
Its the early 1990s,
space travel is frequent;
Everybody's wearing
silver hair with sequins
They're going to the moon
to party their butts off,
But I'm down here,
looking for the green stuff.
Chorus:
Quest for spinach!
I need my greens.
Quest for spinach!
I need my greens.
Quest for spinach!
I need my greeeeeeens...
Its the early 1990s,
the experts were wrong:
Petroleum didn't run out,
you can get it for a song.
But the green stuff is gone
and it's getting very dear.
If you give me some,
I'll cut off both my ears!
Bridge:
O Popeye, won't you save me,
I don't think that I can make it.
If I don't get some spinach,
I'll have to... eat manicotti again!
(audience: Oh no! Not manicotti!)
Longhorn is the best gift MS could ever give to the open-source movement. The whole thing is a joke and no one is going to buy it. No matter how much Linux does or does not suck by then I can't imagine any educated person paying 500 bucks for Longhorn. Especially since Linux has at least two years to improve, probably more like three.
Yeah if it can't even handle a little slashdotting then how am I supposed to keep downloading my gig a second of porno during a nuclear holocaust. Secure my ass, whoever bought this should ask for their money back.
Wow and I thought FCC regulations were the only thing to come out of Janet Jackson's boobies. It goes to show that pornography still provides the incentive for innovation for all major developing technologies. It's actually a little known fact that the people offering the incentives for new space elevator technology are only doing so in hopes of losing their virginity in it one day.
Well this isn't a political ad. It is just critical of bush but doesn't support anyone else, so I don't see what the conflict of interest would be./voting for Nader
People keep saying Moore's movie isn't a documentary because it's full of bias. This is a load of crap, all documentaries have bias. Everything ever written for that matter has bias. If F/911 can be said to be not a documentary it is because he doesn't actually really document anything. It's just him talking over CNN and fox news footage for two hours. That is the thing that pissed me off about this movie, that in the previous ones he and his film crew are taking all the footage, but in this movie its just him narrating his opinions on top of stock footage. It cheapens his message (which I agree with) and lowers the quality of the experience overall.
As an addendum, if you read only one page from his book read this: National Adult Literacy Survey. This shows how the literacy rate has been steadily dropping since schools were introduced. And if you think Gatto is full of shit, google for this survey and read the primary source for yourself. The results will make you Shit Your Pants (tm).
But I've knew a lot of jocks that got accepted to ivy-league schools (or at least prestigious schools) that were complete morons. They were the kind of guy that had the cute chicks do their homework or help them cheat on tests.
I also know a couple like this.
In college, who will (on average) put more towards studying? A person who has historically worked hard at academics because they chose to (despite it not being fun), or someone who worked hard doing something they loved (which was not academics).
What I am saying is that people should be allowed to excel at whatever they want, as long as they excel at something. Football is a bad example because it's a made for TV game and not a real sport. However in college if someone wants to learn how to paint still lifes instead of learning math then I'd have trouble passing judgement over them. Even in college I don't see any reason as to why academics should be the most important thing, on a pedestal above everything else. For example lets say that someone hates studying in the classroom but is really into research, should such a person really be denied from going to a big research institution with lots of opportunities?
My point is this: The people who work the hardest are going to get the farthest in life. It doesn't matter if they work hard in the classroom, at sports, art, music, theatre, entrepreneurship, etc. If you read the book The Game of Life the authors talk about how athletes do much better than non athletes in life in terms of leadership positions and money earned, even though they hate athletes overall. But would you really want the people who will end up being captains of society to be completely uneducated, even if they don't take advantage of the opportunity as much as the person next to them? Sure you can say athletes shouldn't get an education because many of them will go nowhere in life. However the vast majority of women who go to college get married and end up as housewives and many go to college only to find husbands, should they also be denied an education?
You also might be interested to know that there are many companies that hire only athletes because of their perceived superior work ethics. The company Tiger run by Julian Robertson comes to mind. In a recent interview with the Johnson School (Cornell business school) he said that he wanted to try an experiment to hire a total nerd to see if he could function in the real world, but he just never got around with it. So while you may be intrinsically biased against people who don't place studying in the classroom as number one, there are many people who disagree, I among them. Personally I think a strong work ethic, leadership skills, social skills, and all around savvy are much better indicators of who will succeed than GPA alone.
You're right, I was recruited and would not have gotten in otherwise. A lot of people think I've cheated getting into college but I have no moral qualms with it. Personally I think colleges should take the best and most hard working people who have the most potential and burning desire to succeed. Let's face it, Ivy league academics, while very good, aren't really that challenging so pretty much anyone can hack it and at least get by. The way I see it if there is a kid who spends 6 hours a day studying or 6 hours a day at sports practice, I don't see how that is so much less valuable then spending 6 hours a day studying. If you ever ask a teacher why something like math is important to learn, they will tell you that it is important because it teaches you skills that can then be applied to other areas of life and makes you a well rounded person. To me someone who has a burning ambition to succeed in sport or music is no less valuable than someone who only cares about academics, and not only that but only the subjects that high schools consider worthwhile. I was really interested in computers in HS but schools didn't consider that a real subject so I floundered around a lot in classes I had no interest in.
Actually to start from the beginning I used to be a really big computer nerd. OK, well I still am. But I always used to have amazing grades until in 7th grade when I started playing Ultima Online all day for a year and a half. I slept hardly at all and I don't think I went outside once. My parents decided this was really unhealthy so they wanted me to choose a sport, and I decided to take up rowing. Eventually I got pretty adicted to it and spent four or so hours a day training so naturally my grades dropped a bit, not because I got any dumber but just because there are only 24 hours in a day. The thing people don't understand is there really aren't 'athletes' and 'scholars', only people who decide to take up a sport at some point in their life or who devote all of their time to their studies. And for the record I still squint all the time and can't really fully open my eyes in natural sunlight, even though I have been rowing for 6 or 7 years now, because of that year in 7th grade of Ultima Online insanity before I sold the account for 600 bucks a year later.
So the "history of Freedom" is confined to the United States, 1984-2004?
No, but that is as far as 'my reality' extends so anything beyond that I have not personally experienced.
Come on. Relative to real freedom-related events, pretty much anything in the OSS movement is irrelevant. Wikipedia and Firefox are cool, but they have nothing alongside allowing people to vote or publicly speak their mind. Anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot.
Yes, Firefox is just a stupid browser. But then by your logic, the Berlin Wall was just a stupid wall. It's not the fact that Firefox is a new cool browser or Wikipedia is a sweet reference, it's the fact that they are symbolic of something bigger. Wikipedia may not be much in and of itself, but the concept of people joining en masse by the tens of thousands working more or less altruistically on products that will change the course of mankind by equalizing the gap between rich and poor, that is huge. If you don't see this as the start of a revolution, then I guess the berlin wall was just some stupid wall.
Uhh I'm a division 1 varsity athlete at college. I don't have a scholarship, and neither me or anyone else is making any money by my participation in my sport. My sport also does not have the potential to make me a single dime when I graduate. I also go to an Ivy League school, not a single one of which gives a single athletic scholarship so I'm not exactly sure where you are getting this crazy idea from. Only shitty 2nd rate schools give athletic scholarships.
The only reason Duke is popular is because of their basketball team. Before the team their school was practically unknown, and only after their team started winning did more people want to apply and the admissions standards went up, even though the education is still mediocre. Same thing happened to Boston College through their hockey team, a previously unknown random 2nd rate catholic school suddenly became wildly popular because of one or two stars. The people that pay a huge premium to go to these sports colleges are being hugely ripped off, whereas huge research schools that accept more kids get ranked relatively poorly because more kids equals lower admissions standards by definition.
Actually the majority of your education is not paid for by you. Even if you pay 30,000 a year most good universities will spend at least 50,000 dollars per student per year. The balance is paid by both present alumns and also endowments. For example most sports coaches salary's (at my school at least) are paid by endowments donated by alumns and therefore don't cost current students anything.
Slashdot Mirror
Why not just make a phone that is secure in the first place and can't get viruses. This has to be the worst marketing ploy ever.
And the makers of vaseline.
If you are interested in playing Go online, I would recommend Kiseido Go Server, is it is the best there is and its java so it can run on almost any platform.
This tech isn't new. It is the same as was used to make the movie 405 which is freely available for download online. In this short film they pointed a camera on top of a bridge overlooking the highway and took several frames and then spliced them all together so that they could have footage of the highway that looked like there were no cars on it. This is the same idea being used with these glasses, only in real time.
I am skeptical this technology will ever actually take off in carpets like the article suggests. Who would want to have their carpet tell them they were a fatass every time they got up to walk around?
Easy. Start with the 500th oldest edit. Check it if says James brown is great. If yes, go to edit 250. If yes again, go to 125. If no go to 375. Just keep splitting it down the middle and you will never have to look up more than 10 article versions to find out where the change happened. Even if you have no idea where this change occurred it shouldn't take more than 3 minutes to find out even with no formal system.
I wrote an article on kuro5hin about these issues yesterday and today it is on the front page. Have a look for yourself.
If you want to read a great story about Burning Man then read this, from Kuro5hin. One of the best stories from that site in a while.
Speaking of "What the hell was I thinking" how can Bill be both against OSS because it reduces jobs and for the ability to outsource jobs to India? Is there anyone who thinks that this is not doublethink?
I was about to make the same joke, but let me instead add this. Back in 6th grade I used to play the Star Wars Collectable Card Game a bit and they had a weekly chat in an environment with custom star wars themed backgrounds where each person chose an avatar. Or at least that's what I heard because it was a 24 meg download and I could never get it to actually work back in the day. So this technology is at least 9 years old, probably even older than that.
Chorus:
Quest for spinach! I need my greens. Quest for spinach! I need my greens. Quest for spinach! I need my greeeeeeens...
Its the early 1990s, the experts were wrong: Petroleum didn't run out, you can get it for a song. But the green stuff is gone and it's getting very dear. If you give me some, I'll cut off both my ears!
Bridge:
O Popeye, won't you save me, I don't think that I can make it. If I don't get some spinach, I'll have to... eat manicotti again! (audience: Oh no! Not manicotti!)
Longhorn is the best gift MS could ever give to the open-source movement. The whole thing is a joke and no one is going to buy it. No matter how much Linux does or does not suck by then I can't imagine any educated person paying 500 bucks for Longhorn. Especially since Linux has at least two years to improve, probably more like three.
I feel like there should be some obvious joke about hand lotion to be come up with here but I just can't quite grasp it. Someone give me a hand here.
Yeah if it can't even handle a little slashdotting then how am I supposed to keep downloading my gig a second of porno during a nuclear holocaust. Secure my ass, whoever bought this should ask for their money back.
Wow and I thought FCC regulations were the only thing to come out of Janet Jackson's boobies. It goes to show that pornography still provides the incentive for innovation for all major developing technologies. It's actually a little known fact that the people offering the incentives for new space elevator technology are only doing so in hopes of losing their virginity in it one day.
Well this isn't a political ad. It is just critical of bush but doesn't support anyone else, so I don't see what the conflict of interest would be. /voting for Nader
People keep saying Moore's movie isn't a documentary because it's full of bias. This is a load of crap, all documentaries have bias. Everything ever written for that matter has bias. If F/911 can be said to be not a documentary it is because he doesn't actually really document anything. It's just him talking over CNN and fox news footage for two hours. That is the thing that pissed me off about this movie, that in the previous ones he and his film crew are taking all the footage, but in this movie its just him narrating his opinions on top of stock footage. It cheapens his message (which I agree with) and lowers the quality of the experience overall.
As an addendum, if you read only one page from his book read this: National Adult Literacy Survey. This shows how the literacy rate has been steadily dropping since schools were introduced. And if you think Gatto is full of shit, google for this survey and read the primary source for yourself. The results will make you Shit Your Pants (tm).
I also know a couple like this.
In college, who will (on average) put more towards studying? A person who has historically worked hard at academics because they chose to (despite it not being fun), or someone who worked hard doing something they loved (which was not academics).
What I am saying is that people should be allowed to excel at whatever they want, as long as they excel at something. Football is a bad example because it's a made for TV game and not a real sport. However in college if someone wants to learn how to paint still lifes instead of learning math then I'd have trouble passing judgement over them. Even in college I don't see any reason as to why academics should be the most important thing, on a pedestal above everything else. For example lets say that someone hates studying in the classroom but is really into research, should such a person really be denied from going to a big research institution with lots of opportunities?
My point is this: The people who work the hardest are going to get the farthest in life. It doesn't matter if they work hard in the classroom, at sports, art, music, theatre, entrepreneurship, etc. If you read the book The Game of Life the authors talk about how athletes do much better than non athletes in life in terms of leadership positions and money earned, even though they hate athletes overall. But would you really want the people who will end up being captains of society to be completely uneducated, even if they don't take advantage of the opportunity as much as the person next to them? Sure you can say athletes shouldn't get an education because many of them will go nowhere in life. However the vast majority of women who go to college get married and end up as housewives and many go to college only to find husbands, should they also be denied an education?
You also might be interested to know that there are many companies that hire only athletes because of their perceived superior work ethics. The company Tiger run by Julian Robertson comes to mind. In a recent interview with the Johnson School (Cornell business school) he said that he wanted to try an experiment to hire a total nerd to see if he could function in the real world, but he just never got around with it. So while you may be intrinsically biased against people who don't place studying in the classroom as number one, there are many people who disagree, I among them. Personally I think a strong work ethic, leadership skills, social skills, and all around savvy are much better indicators of who will succeed than GPA alone.
Nor do they apparently learn logical fallacies such as the 'straw man'.
Actually to start from the beginning I used to be a really big computer nerd. OK, well I still am. But I always used to have amazing grades until in 7th grade when I started playing Ultima Online all day for a year and a half. I slept hardly at all and I don't think I went outside once. My parents decided this was really unhealthy so they wanted me to choose a sport, and I decided to take up rowing. Eventually I got pretty adicted to it and spent four or so hours a day training so naturally my grades dropped a bit, not because I got any dumber but just because there are only 24 hours in a day. The thing people don't understand is there really aren't 'athletes' and 'scholars', only people who decide to take up a sport at some point in their life or who devote all of their time to their studies. And for the record I still squint all the time and can't really fully open my eyes in natural sunlight, even though I have been rowing for 6 or 7 years now, because of that year in 7th grade of Ultima Online insanity before I sold the account for 600 bucks a year later.
No, but that is as far as 'my reality' extends so anything beyond that I have not personally experienced.
Come on. Relative to real freedom-related events, pretty much anything in the OSS movement is irrelevant. Wikipedia and Firefox are cool, but they have nothing alongside allowing people to vote or publicly speak their mind. Anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot.
Yes, Firefox is just a stupid browser. But then by your logic, the Berlin Wall was just a stupid wall. It's not the fact that Firefox is a new cool browser or Wikipedia is a sweet reference, it's the fact that they are symbolic of something bigger. Wikipedia may not be much in and of itself, but the concept of people joining en masse by the tens of thousands working more or less altruistically on products that will change the course of mankind by equalizing the gap between rich and poor, that is huge. If you don't see this as the start of a revolution, then I guess the berlin wall was just some stupid wall.
Uhh I'm a division 1 varsity athlete at college. I don't have a scholarship, and neither me or anyone else is making any money by my participation in my sport. My sport also does not have the potential to make me a single dime when I graduate. I also go to an Ivy League school, not a single one of which gives a single athletic scholarship so I'm not exactly sure where you are getting this crazy idea from. Only shitty 2nd rate schools give athletic scholarships.
The only reason Duke is popular is because of their basketball team. Before the team their school was practically unknown, and only after their team started winning did more people want to apply and the admissions standards went up, even though the education is still mediocre. Same thing happened to Boston College through their hockey team, a previously unknown random 2nd rate catholic school suddenly became wildly popular because of one or two stars. The people that pay a huge premium to go to these sports colleges are being hugely ripped off, whereas huge research schools that accept more kids get ranked relatively poorly because more kids equals lower admissions standards by definition.
Actually the majority of your education is not paid for by you. Even if you pay 30,000 a year most good universities will spend at least 50,000 dollars per student per year. The balance is paid by both present alumns and also endowments. For example most sports coaches salary's (at my school at least) are paid by endowments donated by alumns and therefore don't cost current students anything.